United States Court of Appeals For the Ninth Circuit

United States
Qirruit Court of Appeals

Sor the Ninth Cirrnit.
GUISHPPI PINASCO,
Plaintiff in Error,

VS.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant in Error.

Gransrript of Rerord.

Upon Writ of Error to the United States District Court of
the Western District af Washington, Northern Division.

Filmer Bros. Co. Print, 330 Jackson St., S. F., Cal

No. 3379

United States
Qirruit Court of Appeals

Kor the Ninth Cirruit.

GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Plaintiff in Error,

VS.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant in Error.

Crauscript of Record.

ee

Upon Writ of Error to the United States District Court of
the Western District of Washington, Northern Division.

Filmer Bros. Co. Print, 830 Jackson St., 8. F., Cal.

INDEX TO THE PRINTED TRANSCRIPT OF
RECORD.

[Olerk’s Note: When deemed likely to be of an important nature,
errors or doubtful matters appearing in the original certified record are
printed literally in italic; and, likewise, cancelled matter appearing in
the original certified record is printed and cancelled herein accord-
ingly. When possible, an omission from the text is indicated by
printing in italic the two words between which the omission seems to
occur. ]

Page
Acceptance Of Service of Citation ............ a1
Amended Motion to Quash Indictment......... 5)
SUMMING ee ea ee 8
meiemimnenna Of WrfOr............ 4. 0nn eee 34
EM ORMMINGCDUIONS ............0005e ase sees 22
Certineate of Clerk U. 8S. District Court to
irieoringn, OF NeGOTd... ....0 a eee 46
OOM ek ee ee ee 49
MGUPRIICMMC WN ee ee z
Motion im Atrest of Judgment................ 15
Motion to Require Government to Elect........ 9
Names and Addresses of Counsel.............. il

Order Denying: Motion to Require Government
AOMIICCIM. ke nt . RS ee vk

Order Fixing Appeal and Supersedeas Bond... 18

Order Overruling Motion in Arrest of Judg-

os ag oc ss yee 16
Order Overruling Motion to Quash Indictment.. 8
Petiiowstor Writ of Hirer ...........-....2. 31
Praccipe tor Transemipt of Record. ........... 43

Recognizance on Writ of Error to Circuit Court
Cmeesppenls ... Goi... eRe » eeeetes eee 20

i Guiseppt Pinasco vs.

Index. Page

Senmbemce ...0. 0... ae i
Stipulation Fixing Time to File Writ of Error

and ‘Citation and Doclsets@aise....... 707. 5

Trel—Méyc8d9: 2:5 cue. eee ime

Trial (Continwed )—Miay 9, Wo... ee 12

Werdiiet: .. .. .24 sate eee eee 14

Wrearit of Teor .. 2... cote eee AT

Names and Addresses of Counsel.
Messrs. TUCKER & HYLAND, Attorneys for
Plaintiff in Error.
307 Lowman Bldg., Seattle, Washington.
GHORGE H. RUMMENS, Esq., Attorney for Plain-
tiff in Error,
612 American Bank Bldg., Seattle, Wash-
ington.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS, Esq., Attorney for Defend-
ant in Error,
310 Federal Bldg., Seattle, Washington.
CHARLOTTE KOLMITZ, Attorney for Defendant
in Heror,
310 Federal Bldg., Seattle, Washington.
Eee]

a ee

Umted States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
November Term, 1918.

No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
Ws.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

*Page number appearing at foot of page of original certified Transcript
of Record.

Z Guisepprt Pinasco vs.

Indictment.

The United States of America,
Western District of Washington,
Northern Division,—ss.

The grand Jurors of the United States of America,
being duly selected, impaneled, sworn and charged
to inquire within and for the Northern Division of
the Western District of Washington, upon their
oaths present:

COUNT A

That GUISEPPI PINASCO on the third dav of
January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen,
in the house occupied by the said Guiseppi Pinasco
on the premises described as the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,”’
situated one-fourth mile north of the Duwamish
River and about ten rods west of the Pacific High-
way in the Northern Division of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, and within the jurisdiction of
the United States District Court for said division
and district, did then and there unlawfully and
feloniously carry on the business of a distiller with-
out having given bond as required by law; contrary
to the form of the statute in [2] such case made
and provided and against the peace and dignity of
the United States of America.

COUNT iI.

And the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths
aforesaid, do further present:

That GUISEPPI PINASCO on the third day of
January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen,
in the house occupied by the said Guiseppi Pinasco

Lhe United States of America. 3

on the premises described as the “Prato Gardens, ”’
situated one-fourth mile north of the Duwamish
River and about ten rods west of the Pacific High-
way in the Northern Division of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, and within the Jurisdiction of
the United States District Court for said division
and district, and within the Internal Revenue Col-
lection District of Washington, being then engaged
in and then intending to be engaged in the business
of a distiller, did then and there wilfully, know-
ingly and unlawfully fail to give notice in writing
to the Collector of Internal Revenue for the collec-
tion district aforesaid, as required by Section 3259
of the Revised Statutes of the United States; con-
trary to the form of the statute in such case made
and provided and against the peace and dignity of
the United States of America.
COUNT III.

And the grand jurors aforesaid, upon their oaths
aforesaid, do further present: [3]

That GUISEPPI PINASCO on the third day of
January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen,
in the house occupied by the said Guiseppi Pinasco
on the premises described as the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,”’
situated one-fourth mile north of the Duwamish
River and about ten rods west of the Pacific High-
way in the Northern Division of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, and within the jurisdiction of
the United States District Court for said division and
district, and within the Internal Revenue Collec-
tion District of Washington, unlawfully did make
and ferment a certain mash fit for distillation, to wit,

4 Guisepp Pinasco vs.

forty gallons of raisin mash, in a certain building,
to wit, the dwelling-house of the said Guiseppi
Pinasco, not then and there a distillery duly au-
thorized according to law; contrary to the form of
the statute in such case made and provided and
against the peace and dignity of the United States
of America.
COUN® TV.

And the grand jurors aforesaid, upon thei oaths
aforesaid, do further present:

That GUISEPPE PINASCO on the third dagen
January, one thousand nine hundred and nineteen,
in the house occupied by the said Guiseppi Pinasco
on the premises described as the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,’’
situated one-fourth mile north of the Duwamish
River and about ten rods west of the Pacific High-
way in the Northern Division of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, and within the jurisdiction of
the United States District Court for said division
and district, and within the Internal Revenue Collec-
tion District of [4] Washington, unlawfully did
use a certain still for the purpose of distilling in a
certain dwelling-house there situate; contrary to the
form of the statute in such case made and provided
and against the peace and dignity of the United
States of America.

ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
United States Attorney.

BEN L. MOORE,
Assistant United States Attorney.

[Indorsed]: Indictment for Violation Sections
3981, 3259, 3282 and™3ao0. i Biie: Wer 7 eee

The United States of America. D

Graham, Foreman Grand Jury. Presented to the
Court by the Foreman of the Grand Jury in open
court, in the presence of the Grand Jury, and filed
in the U. 8. District Court. Mar. 14, 1919. F. ML.
Harshberger, Clerk. By S. E. Leitch, Deputy. [5]

es

In the District Court of the United States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern Di-

ViStON.
No, 4503:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Piaimoii,
VS.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Amended Motion to Quash Indictment.

Comes now the defendant, Guiseppi Pinasco, by
and through Tucker & Hyland, his attorneys, and
moves the Court to quash the first count of the in-
dictment herein, for the following reasons, to wit:

I.

That said count is indefinite, uncertain and insuffi-
cient in law, and it does not state specific or sufficient
facts in law to constitute a crime and offense against
the Government of the United States. That the Act
of Congress under which said offense is sought to be
charged is repealed by the Act of March 3, 1917, com-
monly known as the Reed Amendment.

WA.
That said second count in said indictment is in-

6 Giiseppt Pinasco vs.

definite, uncertain and insufficient in law, and it does
not state specific or sufficient facts in law to con-
stitute a crime and offense against the Government
of the United States. That the Act of Congress
under which said offense is sought to be charged is
repealed by the Act of March 3, 1917, commonly
known as the Reed Amendment. [6]
Iie.

And moves the Court to quash the third count of
said indictment, for the reason that same is indefinite,
uncertain and insufficient in law, and does not state
specific or sufficient facts in law to constitute a crime
and offense against the Government of the United
States. That the Act of Congress under which said
offense is sought to be charged is repealed by the Act
of March 3, 1917, commonly known as the Reed
Amendment.

TV.

And moves the Court to quash the fourth count of
said indictment, for the reason that same is indefinite,
uneertain and insufficient in law, and does not state
specific or sufficient facts in law to constitute a crime
and offense against the Government of the United
States. That the Act of Congress under which said
offense is sought to be charged is repealed by the Act
of March 3, 1917, commonly known as the Reed
Amendment.

Vv.

Said defendant moves to quash the whole of said
indictment, on the ground and for the reason that
there is now commenced and pending in the United
States District Court for the Western District of

The United States of America. 1

Washington, Northern Division, a proceeding en-
titled, ‘‘United States of America, Libelant, v. One
Machine for Corking Bottles, One Blow-Torch, One
Remington 12-gauge repeating shotgun of slide action,
Two 50-pound boxes of Buena Fruita, brand dried
raisins, [wo copper kettles, One rubber hose, Eleven
hundred dollars in currency, One eashier’s check for
$600.00 unendorsed, One one-man cross-cut saw, One
copper still, twenty-gallon capacity, [7] together
with still, cap and coil complete,’’ being No. 4537,
said proceeding being a proceeding of condemnation
of property of the defendant, Guiseppi Pinaseo, for
the same offense charged and set forth in eaeh of the
counts in said indictment herein. Reference 1s
hereby made to the files, records and proceedings 1n
the office of the clerk of said court for certainty, and
this motion is based upon the files, records and pro-
ceedings in said cause, as well as upon the proceed-
ings in the above-entitled action.
TUCKER & HYLAND,
Attorneys for Defendant.
Service of within Amended Motion this 4th day of
Apl., 1919, and receipt of a copy thereof, admitted.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
D.
Attorney for Plaintiff.

[Indorsed]: Amended Motion to Quash Indict-
ment. Filed in the United States District Court,
Western District of Washington, Northern Division.
Apr. 5, 1919. F. M. Harshberger, Clerk. Byts. &
Leitch, Deputy. [8]

8 Guiseppt Pinasco vs.

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.

No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Order Overruling Motion to Quash Indictment.
ARRAIGNMENT—MOTION TO QUASH_ IN-
DICTMENT AND PLEA.

Now, on this 7th day of April, 1919, the above-
named defendant comes into court for arraignment,
accompanied by his attorney Wilmon Tucker. Mo-
tion is made to quash indictment, which is argued by
respective counsel. Motion is denied and defendant
enters a plea of not guilty to the charges against him.
Trial is set forsAgerml 30; 1919.

Journal 7, Page 327. [9]

oe

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
No. 4598.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.

GUISEPPI PINASCO,

Defendant.

The Umted States of America. 9

Motion to Require Government to Elect.

Comes now Guiseppi Pinasco, the defendant above
named, by Tucker & Hyland and Geo. H. Rummens,
his attorneys, and moves the Court as follows:

i

That the plaintiff above named be required to elect
whether it will proceed with and try the defendant
under the indictment in the above-entitled cause, or
whether it will proceed with and try the proceeding
now pending in the above-entitled court in cause
number 4537, entitled:

‘“United States of America, Libelant, vs. One Ma-
chine for Corking Bottles, One blow-torch, One
Remington 12-gauge repeating shotgun of slide ac-
tion, Two 50-pound boxes of Buena Fruita brand
dried raisins, Two copper kettles, One rubber hose,
Eleven hundred dollars in currency, One cashier’s
check for $600.00, unendorsed, One one-man cross-cut
saw, One copper still, twenty-gallon capacity, to-
gether with still, cap and coil complete.:’

This motion is made and based upon the records
and files in this cause, being cause number 4593, and
upon the records and files in cause number 4537,
hereinabove described, and to [10] all of which
reference is hereby made for certainty.

JEU

That in the event of the preceding motion being
denied, and in the alternative, defendant by his coun-
sel aforesaid, moves the Court for an order requiring
the Government to elect whether it will proceed to

10 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

try defendant on Count I, Count II, Count III or
Count IV.

That defendant submits and contends that the
Government does not have the right to try said de-
fendant upon more than one of said counts in said
indictment, for the reason that all of the pretended
offenses charged in said Count IJ, Count IIT and
Count IV, are embraced and contained in and are
but elements going to constitute the offense charged
in the foregoing Count I.

This motion is made and based upon the records
and files in cause number 4593.

TUCKER & HYLAND,
GEHO. H. RUMMENS,
Attorneys for Defendant.

[Indorsed]: Motion to Require Government to
Elect. Filed in the United States District Court,
Western District of Washington, Northern Division.
May 8, 1919. FE. M. Harshberger, Clerk. By 8S. E.
Leitch, Deputy. [11]

ey

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
No. 49938.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,

VS.

GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

The Umted States of America. 11

Trial—Order Denying Motion to Require
Government to Elect.

Now, on this 8th day of May, 1919, the above-
entitled cause comes on for trial, Robt. C. Saunders
and Charlotte Kolmitz appearing for the plaintiff,
and Wilmon Tucker and Geo. H. Rummens for the
defendant said defendant being in court in his own
proper person. Motion is filed bv defendant to re-
quire the plaintiff to elect whether to proceed with
and try defendant under indictment herein or
whether it will proceed with and trv cause No. 4537
in this court. Motion is denied and exception noted.
Motion is filed by defendant to require plaintiff to
elect whether it will proceed to try defendant on
Count I, Count II, Count [1] or Count IV of the in-
dictment, and motion is denied and exception al-
lowed. <A jury being called come and answer to their
names as follows: Ezra T. Pope, W. T. Gray, Ber-
man Schoenfeld, James FE’. Parks, Albert J. Schoe-
phaoester, Charles A. Bailey, E. H. Ahrens, M. J. Hur-
sen, Charles H. Roach, Winfield 8. Riggs, J. N. John-
son and Louis Shorett, twelve good and lawful men
duly empaneled and sworn. Whereupon plaintiff’s
witness Claude W. Estes is sworn and examined.
Defendant objects to the introduction of any evi-
dence on Counts I, I, [11 and IV on the ground that
they do not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime.
Denied and exception allowed. Plaintiff’s witnesses
Kenneth L. Webb, G. Gordon, Carl Prado and W. T.
Beeks are sworn and examined and exhibits Nos. 1, 2,
ona eor (eno. WOE I 12. oy 14, 15, 16, 1%, 1S 19°90

12 Guiseppt Pinasco vs.

and 21 are introduced. Defendant’s witness E. Rh.
Tobey is sworn and examined. And now the hour
of adjournment having arrived, [12] by consent
of parties it is ordered that this cause be continued
until ten o’clock to-morrow morning, and the jurors
having been cautioned, it is ordered that they be
allowed to separate until that hour.
Journal 7, page 356. [13]

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Pair,
vs.

GUYSERPPI PINASUO,

Defendant.

Trial (Continued).

Now, on this day, May 9, 1919, the hour of trial
having arrived, attorneys for both sides present, the
call of the jurv is waived, all being present im their
box, whereupon witnesses for plaintiff are sworn and
examined as follows: W. T. Beeks, recalled; James
H. Woods, W. R. Jarrell, C. EK. Rix, Grant L. Miller,
W. W. Andexson and Rav W. Clough, and exhibit
No. 1 introduced, at which time the plaintiff rests.
George H. Rummens, for defendant, moves the Court
for a directed verdict of not guilty on Counts I, IT,
ITI and IV of the indictment, and each of them on

The United States of America. ie

the ground that none of them contain statements of
fact constituting a crime, and that the evidence ad-
duced does not establish a crime. Motion is denied
and exception allowed. Defendant moves the Court
to require the plaintiff to elect upon which of the
counts of the indictment it will proceed to prosecute.
Motion denied. Exception allowed. Defendant’s
witnesses Joe Columbus, G. B. Perelli, Joe Bessire,
and A. Segale are sworn and examined, at which time
the defendant rests. George H. Rummiens, for de-
fendant, renews his motion for a directed verdict of
‘not guilty’? as above sct forth. Motion denied and
exception allowed. The cause is argued to the jury
by both sides, and the jury being instructed bv the
Court retire in charge of sworn bailiffs for delibera-
tion at 11:50 A. M. It is ordered that the jury and
two bailiffs be fed at Government expense. And now
on this same dav the Jurv comes into open court, to
wit, at 2:00 P.M. The call of the jury is waived, all
present in their box. A verdict is returned as [14]
follows: ‘‘We, the jury 1n the above-entitled cause,
find the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as
charged in Count I of the indictment herein; and fur-
ther find the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as
charged in Count II of the indictment herein; and
further find the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty
as charged in County III of the indictment herein;
and further find the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is
guilty as charged in Count IV of the indictment
herein. Berman Schoenfeld, Foreman.’’ The ver-
dict is ordered filed and the Jury discharged from
further consideration of case and excused for the

14 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

term. Defendant is allowed to go on his present
bond. Defendant is granted 42 days within which to
file any motion or exception he may desire.

Journal 7, page 357. [15]

——— oo

In the District Court of the Umted States for the
Western District of Washington.

No. 4993.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Planter,
VS.
GUISEPPL PINASCO,
Defendant.

Verdict.

We, the jury in the above-entitled cause find the
defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as charged in
Count I of the indictment herein; and further find the
defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as charged in
Count II of the indictment herein; and further find
the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as charged
in Count III of the indictment herein; and further
find the defendant Giuseppi Pinasco is guilty as
charged in Count IV of the indictment herein.

BERMAN SCHOENFELD,
Foreman.

[Indorsed]: Verdict. Filed in the United States
District Court, Western District of Washington,
Northern Division, May 9, 1919. EF. M. Harsh-
berger, Clerk. By 8. E. Leitch, Deputy. [16]

The United States of America. 15

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Dwision.

No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Motion in Arrest of Judgment.

Comes now the defendant, Guiseppe Pinasco, and
moves the Court to arrest the Judgment on the indict-
ment herein, upon which the defendant was con-
victed, and upon each and every count thereof, upon
the ground and for the reason that the facts therein
stated do not constitute a crime or offense against the
laws or statutes of the United States.

WILMON TUCKER,
GEO. H. RUMMENS,
Attorneys for Defendant.

[Indorsed]: Motion in Arrest of Judgment. Filed
in the United States District Court, Western District
of Washington, Northern Division, June 16, 1919.
F. M. Harshberger, Clerk. By S. E. Leitch, Deputy.
[17]

16 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.

No. 4593.
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
IAP eons...
vs.
GUISHPPI PENASEO,
Defendant.

Order Overruling Motion in Arrest of Judgment.

And now on this day there having come for hear-
ing the motion of the defendant for an arrest of judg-
ment herein, and the Court having heard the argu-
ment of Robert C. Saunders, Esq., counsel for the
Government, and of George H. Rummens, Esq., coun-
sel for the defendant, and being fully advised in the
premises ;

IT IS NOW CONSIDERED, ORDERED AND
ADJUDGED that the said motion be and the same is
hereby overruled as to Counts J, II and LV, and sus-
tained as to Count ITI, to all of which the defendant
excepts, and the exception is allowed.

Done in open court this 16th day of June, 1919.

EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge.
O. K.—ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
U.S. Dist. Atty.

[Indorsed]: Filed in the United States District
Court, Western District of Washington, Northern
Division, June 16, 1919. F. M. Harshberger, Clerk.
By S. E. Leitch, Deputy. [18]

The United States of America. i

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.

No. 4993.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GUiSsiPPl PRVASCO,
Defendant.
Sentence.

Comes now on this 16th day of June, 1919, the said
defendant Giuseppi Pinasco into open court for sen-
tence, and being informed by the Court of the charges
herein against him and of his conviction of record
herein, he is asked whether he has any legal cause to
show why sentence should not be passed and judg-
ment had against him, he nothing says save as he be-
fore hath said. Wherefore, bv reason of the law and
the premises, it is considered, ordered and adjudged
by the Court that the defendant is guilty of violating
Secs. 3281, 3259 and 3266, R.8., and that he be pun-
ished by being imprisoned in the King County Jail,
or in such other place as mav be hereafter provided
for the imprisonment of offenders against the laws of
the United States, for the term of thirty days
on Count I, and that he pay a fine of $100.00 on
Count I, and that execution issue therefor; and that
he pay a fine of $100.00 on Count II, and that execu-
tion issue therefor; and that he be confined in
the King County Jail, or in such other place as may
be provided for the imprisonment of offenders

18 Guiseppi Pimasco vs.

against the laws of the United States, for the term of
six months on Count IV, to run concurrently with
Count I, and that he pay a fine of $1,000.00 on Count
IV; and the defendant is to be further imprisoned 1n
the said County Jail until said fines are paid or until
he shall be otherwise discharged by due process of
law.

Judgment and Decree Book No. 2, page 371. [19]

ee ed

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.

No. 4593.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintii,
VS.

GUISEPPE PINASCO,
| Defendant.

Order Fixing Appeal and Supersedeas Bond.

And now on this day the above-named defendant
Guiseppe Pinasco, at the time of sentence, having
given notice of his intention of applving for a writ
of error to the Circuit Court of Appeals and having
at the same time asked the Court for an order fixing
bond to supersede the judgment of the Court, and the
Court being fully advised in the premises ;

IT IS NOW CONSIDERED, ORDERED AND
ADJUDGED, that the appeal and supersedeas bond
herein be and the same is hereby fixed in the sum of
Two Thousand ($2,000.00) ; and it further appearing

The United States of America. 19

that there is now in the hands of the clerk of this
court the sum of Two Thousand ($2,000.00) as bond
for the appearance and trial of said defendant;

IT IS NOW ORDERED that said sum of money
be retained by the Clerk of this Court as and for the
appeal and supersedeas bond of the said defendant
herein.

Done in open court this 16th day of June, 1919.

EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge.
O. K.—ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
U.S. Dist. Atty.

[Indorsed]: Filed in the United States District
Court, Western District of Washington, Northern
Division. June 16,1919. F. M. Harshberger, Clerk.
By S. E. Leitch, Deputy. [20]

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plannin
VS.

GUISEPPE PINASCO,
Defendant.

20 Guiseppt Pinasco vs.

Recognizance on Writ of Error to Circuit Court of
Appeals.

United States of America,
Western District of Washington,
Northern Division,—ss.

Be it remembered that on this 16th dav of June,
1919, before me, F. M. Harshberger, Clerk of the
court aforesaid, personally came Guiseppe Pinasco,
as principal, and acknowledged himself to owe the
United States of America the full sum of Two Thou-
sand ($2,000.00) Dollars, herewith deposited with
said court in cash, if default be made in the condition
following, to wit: The condition of this recognizance
is such that whereas the said Guiseppe Pinasco has
been by the above-entitled court sentenced to pay a
fine and to imprisonment, as set forth in the jJude-
ment of sentence herein, and whereas said Guiseppe
Pinasco has in open court at the time sentence was
pronounced given notice of his intention to apply for
a Writ of Error to the Circuit Court of Appeals, and
for an order fixing his bond thereon and the Court
having fixed said appeal and supersedeas bond at the
sum of Two Thousand ($2,000) Dollars;

NOW, THEREFORE, if the said Guiseppe
Pinasco shall appear before said United —— Cu-
cuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and shall
prosecute his Writ of Error, and shall pay, satisfy
and perform the aforesaid Judgment of sentence, and
shall pay, satisfy and perform any Judgment of the
said United States Circuit Court of Appeals to be en-
tered in said cause or any judgment [21] which

The United States of America. 21

said Circuit Court of Appeals may ordered made or
entered by said United States District Court for
Western District of Washington, Northern Division,
and shall at all times hold himself amenable to and
abide by all orders and process of the aforesaid Dis-
trict Court and the aforesaid Cireuit Court of Ap-
peals, and shall render himself in execution of any
judgment therein, and shall not depart from the
jurisdiction of said United States District Court
without leave thereof, then this recognizance shall be
void; otherwise to remain in full force and virtue.
GUISEPPE PINASCO.
Taken and acknowledged before me this 16th day
of June, 1919.
So. DEL
Deputy Clerk of the United States District Court for
the Western District of Washington.
O. K.—ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
Wes. Daste Atuy.
Foregoing bond is hereby approved.
Dated June 16, 1919.
EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge.

[Endorsed]: Filed in the United States District
Court, Western District of Washington, Northern
Division. June 16. 1919. F. M. Harshberger, Clerk.
By 8. E. Leitch, Deputy. [22]

adi Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

In the District Court of the United States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern

Division.
No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs.
GUISMERriT PIASsCo,
Defendant.

Bill of Exceptions.

BEIT REMEMBERED: That heretofore, and on
the 8th day of May, 1919, this cause came on for trial
before the Honorable Edward I. Cushman, Judge,
presiding; the plaintiff appeared by Robert C.
Saunders, United States District Attorney, and
Charlotte Iolmitz, Assistant United States District
Attorney; the defendant appeared in person and by
his attorneys: Wilmon Tucker and George H. Rum-
mens.

WHEREUPON, the following proceedings were
had, to wit:

Prior to the calling and impaneling of the jury, the
defendant interposed a motion requiring the Govern-
ment to elect whether it would proceed against the
defendant upon the Indictment pending herein or
whether it would proceed with and try a proceeding
now pending in the same court in Cause No. 4537, en-
titled: ‘‘The United States of America, Libelant,
v. One Machine for Corking Bottles, etc.’’;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled and denied

The United States of America. 3

said motion, and to the said order of the Court the
defendant asked and was allowed an exception;

WHEREUPON, a jury was duly impaneled and
sworn [283] andthe opening statement of the Gov-
ernment was made;

WHEREUPON, a witness was called by the Gov-
ernment and duly sworn ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant objected to the in-
troduction of any testimony as to Count No. I of the
Indictment for the reason and upon the ground that
Count No. I does not state facts sufficient to consti-
tute a crime; | |

WHEREUPON, the Court denied and overruled
said objection, and the defendant asked and was
allowed an exception to said ruling;

WHEREUPON, the defendant objected to the in-
troduction of any testimony as to Count No. IT of the
Indictment for the reason and upon the ground that
Count No. IT does not state facts sufficient to con-
stitute a crime ;

WHEREUPON, the Court denied and overruled
said objection, and the defendant asked and was al-
lowed an exception to said ruling;

WHEREUPON. the defendant objected to the in-
troduction of any testimony as to Count No. III of
the Indictment for the reason and upon the ground
that Count No. III does does not state facts sufficient
to constitute a crime;

WHEREUPON, the Court denied and overruled
said objection, and the defendant asked and was al-
lowed an exception to said ruling;

WHEREUPON, the defendant objected to the

24 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

[24] introduction of any testimony as to Count No.
IV of the Indictment for the reason and upon the
eround that Count No. IV does not state facts suf-
ficient to constitute a crime;

WHEREUPON, the Court denied and overruled
said objection and the defendant asked and was al-
lowed an exception to said ruling ;

WHEREAS, over the said objections and the
said exceptions, the Government then offered testi-
mony which was received and which tended to prove
that on January 3, 1919, in the house occupied by the
said Guiseppi Pinasco, on the premises described as
the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,’’ situated one-fourth mile north
of the Duwamish River and about ten rods west of
the Pacific Highway, in the Northern Division of
the Western District of Washington, the defendant,
Guiseppi Pinasco, did carry on the business of a
distiller without having given a bond of a distiller;
that the said defendant on January 3, 1919, in the
house occupied by him on the premises described as
the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,’’ situated one-fourth mile north
of the Duwamish River and about ten rods west of
the Pacific Highway, in the Northern Division of the
Western District of Washington and within the In-
ternal Revenue Collection District of Washington,
being then and there engaged in and intending to be
engaged in the business of a distiller, did then and
there fail to give notice in writing to the Collector of
Internal Revenue, for the collection district afore-
said; that on the third day of January, 1919, in the
house occupied by the said Guiseppi Pinasco, on the
premises described as the ‘‘ Prato Gardens,”’ situated

The United States of America. 25

one-fourth mile north of the [25] Duwamish
River and about ten rods west of the Pacific High-
way, In the Northern Division of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, and within the Internal Rey-
enue Collection District of Washington, the said de-
fendant, Guiseppi Pinasco, did make and ferment a
certain mash fit for distillation, to wit, forty gallons
of raisin mash, in a certain building, to wit, the
dwelling-house of the said defendant, said house not
then and there being an authorized distillery; that
the defendant, Guiseppi Pinasco, on the 3d day of
January, 1919, in the house occupied by the said
Guiseppi Pinasco, on the premises described as the
‘‘Prato Gardens,’’ situated one-fourth mile north of
the Duwamish River and about ten rods west of the
Pacific Highway, in the Northern Division of the
Western District of Washington, and within the In-
ternal Revenue Collection District of Washington,
did use a certain still for the purpose of distilling
in a certain dwelling-house there situated ;

WHEREUPON, the Goverment rested.

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
for an order instructing and directing the jury to re-
turn a verdict of not guilty as to Count One of the In-
dictment upon the ground and for the reason that the
Indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute
a crime, and that there is not sufficient evidence to
warrant a conviction under said Count One of said
Indictment ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said objec-
tion, and denied said motion, and refused to give said
instruction, to which ruling the defendant then and

26 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

there asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
for [26] an order instructing and directing the
jury to return a verdict of not guilty as to Count Il
of the Indictment upon the ground and for the reason
that the Indictment does not state facts sufficient to
constitute a crime, and that there is not sufficient evi-
dence to warrant a conviction under said Count Two
of said Indictment;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said objec-
tion, and denied said motion, and refused to give said
instruction, to which ruling the defendant then and
there asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
for an order instructing and directing the jury to re-
turn a verdict of not guilty as to Count III of the
Indictment upon the ground and for the reason that
the Indictment does not state facts sufficient to con-
stitute a crime, and that there is not sufficient evi-
dence to warrant a conviction under said Court III of
said Indictment ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said objec-
tion, and denied said motion, and refused to give said
instruction, to which ruling the defendant then and
there asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
for an order instructing and directing the jury to re-
turn a verdict of not guilty as to Count IV of the In-
dictment upon the ground and for the reason that
the Indictment does not state facts sufficient to con-
stitute a crime, and that there is not sufficient evi-

The Umited States of America. 21

dence to warrant a conviction under said Count IV
of said Indictment ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said objec-
tion, and denied said motion, and refused to give said
[27] instruction, to which ruling the defendant
then and there asked and was allowed an exception;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty
upon Counts I, IJ, IJ] and IV of the Indictment,
upon the ground and for the reason that none of
them, either taken separately or all together, state
facts sufficient to constitute a crime, and that there
is no fact proven sufficient to carry the case to the
Jury on all or any of said counts of said Indictment,
and the defendant entitled to an affirmative instruc-
tion to the jury of not guilty;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion,
and denied said request, and refused to give said in-
struction, to which ruling and said order the defend-
ant asked and was allowed an exception;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
for an order to require the Government to then and
there elect whether it should proceed to prosecute
upon Count I, Count II, Count III or Count IV of
the Indictment, and to require the Government to
elect which of said count, or counts, other than the
whole number, it shall proceed to prosecute under;

WHEREUPON, the Court refused to grant said
motion, and overruled and denied the same, and to
this ruling the defendant asked and was allowed an
exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant offered testimony

28 Guiseppr Pinasco vs.

which was received, and which tended to disprove the
allegations of the Indictment and to controvert the
proof offered and received on behalf of the Govern-
ment ;

WHEREUPON, both sides rested, [28]

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty
upon Count I of the Indictment upon the ground and
for the reason that Count I of said Indictment does
not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime; that
the testimony does not show the defendant to be guilty
of any crime, and that there are not sufficient facts
to warrant the submission of the cause to the jury ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion,
denied the same, and refused to give said instruction
to the jury, and to the ruling of the Court the defend-
ant asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty
upon Count II of the Indictment upon the ground
and for the reason that Count II of said Indictment
does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime;
that the testimony does not show the defendant to be
guilty of any crime and that there are not sufficient
facts to warrant the submission of the cause to the
Jury ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion,
denied the same, and refused to give said instruction
to the jury, and to the ruling of the Court the de-
fendant asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty

The United States of America. 29)

upon Count III of the Indictment upon the ground
and for the reason that Count III of said Indictment
does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime;
that the testimony does not show the defendant to be
euilty of any crime, and [29] that there are not
sufficient facts to warrant the submission of the cause
to the jury ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion,
denied the same, and refused to give said instruction
to the Jury, and to the ruling of the Court the de-
fendant asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty
upon Count IV of the Indictment upon the ground
and for the reason that Count IV of said Indictment
does not state facts sufficient to constitute a crime;
that the testimony does not show the defendant to
be guilty of any crime, and that there are not suff-
cient facts to warrant the submission of the cause to
the jury ;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion,
denied the same, and refused to give said instruction
to the Jury, and to the ruling of the Court the de-
fendant asked and was allowed an exception ;

WHEREUPON, the defendant moved the Court
to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty
upon each and every count of the Indictment, and
upon all of them, for the reasons theretofore stated;

WHEREUPON, the Court overruled said motion
and denied the same, and refused to give said instruc-
tion, and to the ruling of the Court, the defendant
asked and was allowed an exception ;

30 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

WHEREUPON, the Court having instructed the
jury, and the jury having retired for deliberation, the
jury on May 9, 1919, returned and filed herein a
verdict finding the defendant to be guilty on Count
No. I, Count No. II, Count No. IIT and Count No.
IV of the Indictment. [30]

I hereby certify that within the time fixed by the
ruling of this Court and the stipulation of the re-
spective parties in the within entitled criminal ac-
tion, the foregoing Bill of Exceptions was duly pre-
sented to me for settlement and allowance. It
contains all of the material facts in the cause neces-
sary to a full understanding thereof, and

IT LS HEREBY, on this Ist day of July, 2009,
SETTLED AND ALLOWED as the Bill of Excep-
tions in this cause.

Dated this Ist day of July, 1919.

EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge.
United States of America,
Western District of Washington,—ss.

Due and legal service of the within Bill of Excep-
tions is admitted this 24th day of June, 1919.

ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
United States Attorney.

[Indorsed]: Bill of Exceptions. Filed in the
United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division, July 1, 1919. F.
M. Harshberger, Clerk. By 8S. E. Leitch, Deputy.
[31]

The United States of America. 3p)

In the District Court of the United States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern

Dwision.
No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs. .
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Petition for a Writ of Error.

To the Above-entitled Court and to the Honorable
EDWARD E. CUSHMAN, Judge of the United
States District Court aforesaid:

Now comes the above-named defendant, Guiseppi
Pinasco, and by his attorneys, Tucker & Hyland and
George H. Rummens, respectfully shows:

That heretofore and on the 9th day of May, 1919,
a jury in the above-entitled court and cause returned
and filed herein a verdict finding the above-named
defendant guilty upon Counts I, I, III and IV of
an Indictment, theretofore filed in the above-entitled
court and cause against the defendant herein, on the
14th day of March, 1919; that thereafter and on the
16th day of June, 1919, the defendant was, by the
order and sentence of the above-entitled court and
in said cause, sentenced to pay a fine of One Hundred
Dollars and to serve a term of thirty days in the King
County Jail on Count I of said Indictment; to pay a
fine of One Hundred Dollars on Count II of said
Indictment; and to serve a term of six months in said

Sys Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

King County Jail on Count IV of said Indictment,
[32] said sentence to run concurrently with the
sentence pronounced as aforesaid upon said Count I
of said Indictment;

Your petitioner herein, the above-named defend-
ant, feeling himself aggrieved by the said verdict, the
said judgment and the said sentence of the Court,
entered herein as aforesaid, and by the orders and
rulings of said Court and proceedings therein, now
herewith petitions this Court for an order allowing
him to prosecute a writ of error from said judgment
and sentence to the Circuit Court of Appeals of the
United States for the Ninth Circuit, under the laws
of the United States and in accordance with the pro-
cedure of said Court in such cases made and pro-
vided; to the end that the said proceedings as herein
recited and as more fully set forth in the assign-
ments of error presented herewith may be reviewed,
and the manifest error appearing upon the face of the
record of said proceedings may be by said Cireuit
Court of Appeals corrected; and that for said pur-
poses a writ of error and citation thereon should
issue as by the law and the ruling of the Court is
provided;

Whereupon, the premises considered, your peti-
tioner prays that a writ of error do issue; to the end
that the said proceedings of the United States Dis-
trict Court for the said Western District of Wash-
ington may be reviewed and corrected, the said
errors in said record being herewith assigned and
presented herewith; that pending the final deter-
mination of said writ of error by said Appellate

The Umted States of America. oe

Court, an order be made and entered herein that all
further proceedings shall be suspended and stayed
until the determination of said writ of error by said
[33] Circuit Court of Appeals.
WILMON TUCKER and
GEO. H. RUMMENS,
Attorneys for the Petitioner, the Plaintiff in Error.

The writ of error is granted on this, the Ist day
of July, 1919, a supersedeas bond having been fixed
by the Court in the sum of Two Thousand Dollars,
which has been given, filed herein and in all things
approved.

EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge.
United States of America,
Western District of Washington,—ss.

Due and legal service of the within Petition for a

Writ of Error is admitted this 24th day of June, 1919.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
United States Attorney.

[Indorsed]: Petition for a Writ of Error. Filed in
the United States District Court, Western District
of Washington, Northern Division. June 24, 1919.
F. M. Harshberger, Clerk. ByS. E. Leitch, Deputy.
[34] |

34 Guseppi Pinasco vs.

In the District Court of the United States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern

Division.
No. 4593.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Assignments of Error.

Comes now the above-named defendant, Guiseppi
Pinasco, and in connection with his petition for a
writ of error in this cause, submitted and filed herein
and herewith, assigns the following errors which the
defendant avers and says occurred at the trial of the
above-entitled cause, in the above-entitled court,
during the proceedings had therein and upon which
he relies to reverse, set aside and correct the judg-
ment and sentence entered herein, and says that
there is manifest error appearing upon the face of the
record in this:

aI

That the Court erred in overruling the demurrer
of the defendant to Count No. I of said Indictment
and in not sustaining said demurrer to said Count I
of said Indictment.

ML,

That the Court erred in overruling the demurrer

of the defendant to Count No. IT of said Indictment

The United States of America. — 20

and in not sustaining said demurrer to said Count IT
of said Indictment. [35]
JUL

That the Court erred in overruling the demurrer
of the defendant to Count No. IIT of said Indictment
and in not sustaining said demurrer to said Count
III of said Indictment.

LNE

That the Court erred in overruling the demurrer
of the defendant to Count No. IV of said Indictment
and in not sustaining said demurrer to said Count IV
of said Indictment.

V.

That the Court erred in overruling the demurrer
of the defendant to said Indictment and in holding
the defendant to trial on account thereof.

Ral

That the Court erred in overruling and in not
sustaining the amended motion to quash the first
count of said Indictment for the reasons that said
count is indefinite, uncertain, insufficient in law, and
does not state specific or sufficient facts in law to
constitute a crime or offense against the Government
of the United States or the laws thereof; that the Act
of Congress under which said offense 1s sought to be
charged had, prior to the alleged commission of said
offense and the return of said Indictment and the fil-
ing thereof, been by the Congress of the United
States repealed both expressly and by implication.

Vol,

That the Court erred in overruling and in not

sustaining the amended motion to quash the second

36 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

count of said Indictment for the reasons that said
count is [86] indefinite, uncertain, insufficient in
law, and does not state specific or sufficient facts in
law to constitute a crime or offense against the Gov-
ernment of the United States or the laws thereof;
that the Act of Congress under which said offense is
sought to be charged had, prior to the alleged com-
mission of said offense and the return of said Indict-
ment and the filing thereof, been by the Congress of
the United States repealed both expressly and by im-
plication.
Vil,

That the Court erred in overruling and in not
sustaining the amended motion to quash the third
count of said Indictment for the reasons that said
count is indefinite, uncertain, insufficient in law, and
does not state specific or sufficient facts in law to
constitute a crime or offense against the Government
of the United States or the laws thereof; that the Act
of Congress under which said offense 1s sought to be
charged had, prior to the alleged commission of said
offense and the return of said Indictment and the fil-
ing thereof, been by the Congress of the United
States repealed both expressly and by unplhication.

IX.

That the Court erred in overruling and in not
sustaining the amended motion to quash the fourth
count of said Indictment for the reasons that said
sount is indefinite, uncertain, insufficient in law, and
does not state specific or sufficient facts in law to
constitute a crime or offense against the Government
of the United States or the laws thereof; that the Act

The United States of America. aa

of Congress under which said offense is sought to be
charged had, prior to the alleged commission of said
offense and the return of said Indictment and the fil-
ing thereof, been by the Congress of the United
[37] States repealed both expressly and by impli-
cation.

X.

That the Court erred in overruling the amended
motion of the defendant to quash the whole of said
Indictment in its entirety on the ground and for the
reason that there was then and there pending in
the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington, Northern Division, a pro-
ceeding then and there entitled: ‘‘United States of
America, Libelant, vs. One Machine for Corking Bot-
tles, One Blow-torch, One Remington 12-guage re-
peating Shotgun of Slide Action, Two 50-Pound
Boxes of Buena Fruita Brand Dried Raisins, Two
Copper Kettles, One Rubber Hose, Eleven Hundred
Dollars in Currency, One Cashier’s Check for $600.00
unendorsed, One One-man Cross-cut Saw, One Cop-
per Still, Twenty-gallon Capacity, Together with
Still, Cap and Coil Complete,’’ being No. 4537, said
proceeding being a proceeding of condemnation of
property of the defendant, Guiseppi Pinasco, for the
same offense charged and set forth in each of the
counts in said Indictment herein; and reference 1s
hereby expressly made to the files, records and pro-
ceedings in the office of the clerk of said court for
certainty, and this motion was based and this assign-
ment predicated upon the said files, records and pro-
ceedings in said cause and upon the proceedings In

38 . Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

the above-entitled criminal action.
XI.

That the Court erred in making and entering its
order herein prior to the reception of any testimony
upon the part of the Government in overruling the
motion of the defendant to require the Government
to elect the ground and cause upon which the Gov-
ernment would proceed to trial; [88] that the
Government should be required to elect and say
whether it would then proceed with and try the de-
fendant under the Indictment in said cause, or
whether it would proceed with and try the proceed-
ing pending in the above-entitled court and cause,
known as Cause No. 45387, entitled: ‘‘ United States of
America, Libelant, vs. One Machine for Corking Bot-
tles, ete.’’

XT.

That the Court erred, immediately prior to the
introduction of any testimony upon the part of the
Government, in overruling the objection of the de-
fendant to the introduction of any testimony on the
part of the Government in relation to Count No. 1
of said Indictment for the reason and upon the
eround that said Count I does not state facts suffi-
cient to constitute a crime.

PeLaL

That the Court erred, immediately prior to the
introduction of any testimony upon the part of the
Government, in overruling the objection of the de-
fendant to the introduction of any testimony on the
part of the Government in relation to Count No. I1
of said Indictment for the reason and upon the

The United States of America. ao

ground that said Count IT does not state facts suffi-
cient to constitute a crime.
Dey.

That the Court erred in, immediately prior to the
introduction of any testimony upon the part of the
Government, overruling the objection of the de-
fendant to the introduction of any testimony on the
part of the Government in relation to Count No. III
of said Indictment for the reason and upon the
ground that said Count III does not state facts suffi-
cient to constitute a crime. [389]

XV.

That the Court erred in, immediately prior to the
introduction of any testimony upon the part of the
Government, overruling the objection of the de-
fendant to the introduction of any testimony on the
part of the Government in relation to Count No. IV
of said Indictment for the reason and upon the
ground that said Count IV does not state facts suff-
cient to constitute a crime.

XVI.

That at the conclusion of the evidence of the Gov-
ernment, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant that the Court should then and there
instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as
to Count I of the Indictment for the reason and upon
the ground that said Count I does not state facts
sufficient to constitute a crime, and that there is not
sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction thereon.

KV,

That at the conclusion of the evidence of the Gov-

ernment, the Court erred in overruling the motion of

40 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

the defendant that the Court should then and there
instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as
to Count I of the Indictment for the reason and upon
upon the ground that said Count II does not state
facts sufficient to constitute a crime, and that there is
not sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction
thereon.
KV40T.

That at the conclusion of the evidence of the Gov-
ernment, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant that the Court should then and there
instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as
to Count III [40] of the Indictment for the reason
and upon the ground that said Count ITI does not
state facts sufficient to constitute a crime, and that
there is not sufficient evidence to warrant a convic-
tion thereon.

EDS

That at the conclusion of the evidence of the Gov-
ernment, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant that the Court should then and there
instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as
to Count IV of the Indictment for the reason and upon
the ground that said Count IV does not state facts
sufficient to constitute a crime, and that there 1s not
sufficient evidence to warrant a conviction thereon.

KNX.

That at the conclusion of all of the testimony of-
fered on behalf of both the Government and the de-
fendant. the Court erved in overruling the motion of
the defendant to instruct the Jury to return a verdict
of not guilty upon Count IL of the Indictment upon

The United States of America. 41

the ground and for the reason that Count I of the In-
dictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute
a crime, and that the testimony does not show the de-
fendant to be guilty of any crime.

EST.

That at the conclusion of all of the testimony of-
fered on behalf of both the Government and the de-
fendant, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant to instruct the jury to return a verdict
of not guilty upon Count I of the Indictment upon
the ground and for the reason that Count IT of the
Indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute
a crime, and that the [41] testimony does not
show the defendant to be guilty of any crime.

NETL.

That at the conclusion of all of the testimony of-
fered on behalf of both the Government and the de-
fendant, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant to instruct the jury to return a verdict
of not guilty upon Count ILI of the Indictment upon
the ground and for the reason that Count ITT of the
Indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute
a crune, and that the testimony does not show the de-
fendant to be guilty of any crime.

PO GUGE

That at the conclusion of all of the testimony of-
fered on behalf of both the Government and the de-
fendant, the Court erred in overruling the motion of
the defendant to instruct the jury to return a verdict
of not guilty upon Count IV of the Indictment upon
the ground and for the reason that Count IV of the
Indictment does not state facts sufficient to constitute

42 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

a crime, and that the testimony does not show the de-
fendant to be guilty of any crime.
XXIV.

That the Court erred in overruling the motion in-
terposed by the defendant in arrest of judgment on
the Indictment herein upon which the defendant was
convicted and upon each and every count thereof,
upon the ground and for the reason that the facts
therein stated do not constitute a crime or offense
against the laws of the United States.

XXYV.

That the Court erred in sentencing the defendant

[42] upon Count I of the Indictment.
XXVI.

That the Court erred in sentencing the defendant

upon Count IT of the Indictment.
RXVILE.

That the Court erred in sentencing the defendant
upon Count IV of the Indictment.

And as to each, every and all of said assignments
of error, the defendant says that at the time of the
making of the order, or ruling of the Court com-
plained of, the defendant duly asked and was allowed
an exception to the ruling and the order of the Court.

WILMON TUCKER and
GEO. H. RUMMENS,
Attorneys for the Defendant Herein, the Plaintiff in
Error.
United States of America,
Western District of Washington,—ss.
Due and legal service of the within Assignments of

The Umted States of America. 43

Error is admitted this 24th day of June, 1919.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
United States Attorney.

[Indorsed]: Assignments of Error. Filed in the
United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division. June 24, 1919. F.
M. Harshberger, Clerk. By S. E. Leitch, Deputy.
[43 ]

Inthe District Court of the United States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern Di-

VISiON.
No. 45938.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.
GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant.

Praecipe for Transcript of Record.

To the Clerk of the United States District Court for
the Western District of Washington, Northern
Division:

In making up the record in the above-entitled
cause for the United States Circuit Court of Appeals,
you are directed to include in the Transcript the fol-
lowing documents:

1. The indictment.

44

SS hae

ee

Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

The amended motion to quash the indictment.

The order of the Court overruling this motion.

The journal entry showing the plea of not guilty.

The motion to require the Government to elect.

The order of the Court denying said motion.

The Journal entry of the Court showing the rec-
ord of the first day’s proceedings at the trial,
showing that the Jury was impaneled. [44]

The journal entry showing the return of the
verdict with a copy of said verdict as filed.

The motion in arrest of Judgment.

The order of the Court denying said motion.

The judgment and sentence of the Court.

The order of the Court fixing the appeal and
supersedeas bond.

The appeal bond and supersedeas bond.

The bill of exceptions.

The petition for a writ of error with order al-
lowing the writ endorsed thereon.

The assignments of error.

The writ of error.

The citation on the writ of error.

The acceptance of service of the citation.

The clerk’s certificate.

This praecipe.

Dated at Seattle, Washington, this third day of

July, 1919.

WILMON TUCKER and
GEO. H. RUMMENS,
Attorneys for the Defendant.

The United States of America. 45

Service of the above praecipe is hereby accepted
this 3d day of July, 1919.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
By CHARLOTTE KOLMITZ,
Nest) U.S atu.
United States District Attorney for the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, Northern Division. [45]

We waive the provisions of the Act approved Feb-
ruary 13, 1911, and direct that vou forward type-
written transcript to the Circuit Court of Appeals
for printing as provided under Rule 105 of this
Coun.

WILMON TUCKER,
GEORGE H. RUMMENS,
For Plainiit in Witton

[Indorsed]: Praecipe. Filed in the United States
District Court, Western District of Washington,
Northern Division. July 3, 1919. F. M. Harsh-
berger, Clerk. By 8S. E. Leitch Deputy. [46]

——_————

United States District Court, Western District of
Washington, Northern Division.
No. 4598.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
VS.

GUISEPPE PINASCO,

Defendant.

46 Guiseppt Pinasco vs.

Certificate of Clerk U.S. District Court to Transcript
of Record.

United States of America,

Western District of Washington,—ss.

I, F. M. Harshberger, Clerk of the United States
District Court, for the Western District of Wash-
ington, do hereby certify this typewritten transcript
of record consisting of pages numbered from 1 to 46,
inclusive, to be a full, true, correct and complete copy
of so much of the record, papers and other proceed-
ings in the above and foregoing entitled cause, as is
required by praecipe of counsel filed and shown
herein, as the same remain of record and on file in
the office of the clerk of said District Court, and that
the same constitute the record on return to said Writ
of Error herein from the Judgment of said United
States District Court for the Western District of
Washington to the United States Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. —

I further certifv the following to be a full, true
and correct statement of all expenses, costs, fees and
charges incurred and paid in my office by or on be-
half of the plaintiff in error for making record, cer-
tificate or return to the United States Cireuit Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the above-entitled
cause, to wit: [47]

Clerk’s fee (Sec. 828, R. 8S. U. 8.), for mak-
ing record, certificate or return, 93 folios

Sit We on. 2 $13.95
Certificate of Clerk to transcript of record—
4 fohosets WW ee 60

Cweleto- saad Certiieate.............9.5...8 120,

The Umted States of America. AT

I hereby certify that the above cost for preparing
and certifying record amounting to $14.75 has been
paid to me by attorneys for plaintiff in error.

I further certify that I hereto attach and herewith
transmit the original Writ of Error and original
Citation issued in this cause.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF T have hereto set my
hand and affixed the seal of said District Court at
Seattle, in said District, this 30th day of July, 1919.

[Seal ] Fr. M. HARSHBERGER,

Clerk United States District Court. [48]

ne

In the United States Cirewt Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circutt.

No. 4598.

GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Plaintiff in Error,

VS.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant in Error.

Writ of Error.

The United States of America,—ss.

The President of the United States of America to
the Honorable EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
Judge of the District Court of the Western Dis-
trict of Washington, Northern Division, and to
said Court, GREETING:

Because in the record and proceedings, as also
in the rendition of the Judgment and sentence in the

48 Guiseppt Pasco vs.

District Court of the United States for the Western
District of Washington, Northern Division, in a
eause pending therein, wherein the United States of
America was plaintiff and Guiseppi Pinasco was de-
fendant, a manifest error happened and occurred to
the damage of the said Guiseppi Pinasco, the above-
named plaintiff in error, as by his petition and com-
plaint doth appear, and we being willing that error,
if any there hath been, should be corrected, and full
and speedy justice be done to the parties aforesaid
in this behalf, do command you that under your seal
you send the record and proceedings aforesaid, with
all things concerning the same and [49] pertain-
ing thereto, to the United States Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, together with this
writ so that you may have the same at San Fran-
cisco, California, where said court is sitting, within
thirty days of the date hereof, in the said Cireuit
Court of Appeals to be then and there held, and the
records and proceedings aforesaid being inspected,
the said United States Court of Appeals may cause
further to be done therein to correct the error what
of right, and according to the Jaw and-the custom of
the United States should be done.

WITNESS the Honorable EDWARD DOUG-
LASS WHITH, the Chief Justice of the United
States, this the Ist day of July, 1919.

[Seal] F, M. HARSHBERGER,

Clerk.
By 5S. HE. Leiteh,
De niin.

The United States of America. 49

Allowed this the 1st day of July, 1919.
EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
United States Judge.
Received a copy of the within Writ of Error this
isimday of July, LON,
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
Attorney for United States. [50]

[Endorsed]: Original. In the United States Cir-
cult Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cireuit.
Guiseppi Pinasco, Plaintiff in Error vs. The United
States of America, Defendant in Error. No.
Writ of Error. Filed in the United States District
Court, Western District of Washington, Northern
Division. Jul. 1, 1919. EF. M. Harshberger, Clerk.
By 8. E. Leitch, Deputy. [51]

oe

In the District Court of the Uiited States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern Di-
vison.

No. 4593,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff and Defendant in Error,
VS.

GUISEHEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant and Plaintiff in Error.

Citation.

To the United States of America and to ROBERT
C. SAUNDERS, United States District Attor-
ney, in the Western District of Washington:

You are hereby cited and admonished to be and

50 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

appear in the United States Circuit Court of Ap-
peals, for the Ninth Circuit to be held in the city of
san Francisco, State of California, on the 1st day
of August, 1919, pursuant to an order allowing a
writ of error, filed and entered in the Clerk’s office
of the District Court of the United States, for the
Western ‘District of Washington, Northern Division,
on a final judgment and sentence signed, filed and
entered on the 16th day of June, 1919, in a certain
action and cause, being No. 4093, and entitled, ‘‘The
United States of America vs. Guiseppi Pinasco,’’ to
show cause, if any there be, why the judgment and
sentence against the said Guiseppi Pinasco, the plain-
tiff in error herein, as in said order allowing the said
writ mentioned doth appear, should not be corrected,
and why justice should not be done [52] in the
premises.

WITNESS the Honorable EDWARD E. CUSH-
MAN, District Judge for the Western District of
Washington, Northern Division this 1st day of July,
JON.

EDWARD E. CUSHMAN,
United States District Judge for Western District
of Washington, Northern Division.

[Seal ] Attest: F. M. HARSHBERGER,

Clerk.
By 8. E. Leitch,
Deputy. [53]

The United States of America. oil

In the District Court of the Uiuted States for the
Western District of Washington, Northern Di-
Vision.

No. 4593.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff and Defendant in Error,
VS.

GUISEPPI PINASCO,
Defendant and Plaintiff in Error.

Acceptance of Service of Citation.

The undersigned, attorney of record for the above-
named plaintiff, the defendant in error, hereby ad-
mits service of citation and service of the writ of
error herein, and hereby enters appearance for the
United States of America, in the United States Cir-
cuit Court of Appeals, for the Ninth Circuit.

Dated this Ist day of July, 1919.

ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
Attorney for the United States of America, the
Above-named Plaintiff, the Defendant in Error.
[54]

[Endorsed]: Original. In the District Court of
the United States for the Western District of Wash-
ington, Northern Division. United States of Amer-
ica, Plaintiff and Defendant nm Error, vs. Guiseppi
Pinasco, Defendant and Plaintiff in Error. No.
4593. Citation. Filed in the United States Dis-
trict Court, Western District of Washington, North-
ern Division. Jul. 1, 1919. F. M. Harshberger,
Clerk. By S. E. Leitch, Deputy. [55]

52 Guiseppi Pinasco vs.

[Endorsed]: No. 3379. United States Circuit
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Guiseppi
Pinasco, Plaintiff in Error, vs. The United States of
America, Defendant in Error. Transcript of Rec-
ord. Upon Writ of Error to the United States Dis-
trict Court of the Western District of Washington,
Northern Division.

Filed August 15, 1919.

F. D. MONCKTON;,
Clerk of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit.
By Paul P. O’Brien,
Deputy Clerk.

——

Inthe Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Cireut.
No. —— (Not Docketed).

GUISEHEPPE PINASCO,
Plaintiff in Error,
VS.

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant in Error.

Stipulation Fixing Time to File Writ of Error and
Citation and Docket Cause.

The plaintiff in error having sued out his writ of
error, served the same and the citation on July 1,
1919,—

IT IS STIPULATED, by and between respective
counsel, that the plaintiff in error may have and take
until August 15, 1919, including all of said day, to
file in the Circuit Court of Appeals, for the Ninth

The United States of America. an

Circuit, at San Francisco, California, the said writ
of error, the citation thereon, the transcript of rec-
ord in said cause, and cause the said case to be
docketed.
Dated at Seattle, Washington, this, the 22d day
of July, 1919.
Vared San Francisco, Cal., July 25, 1919.
ROBT. C. SAUNDERS,
United States Attorney.
TUCKER & HYLAND,
Attornevs for Plaintiff in Error.
So ordered.
W.H. HONT,
United States Circuit Judge.

[Endorsed]: No. 3379. In the Circuit Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Guiseppi Pinasco,
Plaintiff in Error, vs. The United States of America,
Defendant in Error. Stipulation. Filed Jul. 29,
1919. F. D. Monckton, Clerk. Refiled Aug. 15,
1919. EF. D. Monckton, Clerk.